pres debate #2 (Page 5)

Planned Parenthood and other similar organizations will still be alive and well without Federal Govt. handouts.

Why do you hate women in the workplace?

With all of the money we throw at this problem the logical conclusion you spout is happening now with all the money that's thrown at it anyway,,,,,, Billions of $$$$ and we still have tons of welfare babies, generations of them. Looks like we'll have the same problem, it will just be costing the tax payer a less.

I don't I lust them a lot!!!!

Actually, it won't...and I think you know that.  Rather than go through the real costs (which I'm sure you fellas can do on your own) I am deciding to get some sleep now!  I'm exhausted.  Good night all.

Biggest and best lie tonight, was when Obama sounded so sincere and authoritative saying he was offended that Romney would suggest He, (Obama) his SOS or UN Ambassador would mislead the American people for political reasons on the Benghazi Attack (or was it a sudden and spontaneous outburst by normal citizens (carrying RPG's & Mortars, I'm sure for personal protection) upset about a YouTube video).

Romney really let him off the hook here.

The moderator I hear has apologized for her incorrect statement confirming what Obama was claiming.

Wonder how much press that will get?

Get some sleep and try again in the morning, this is as clear as mud as to what you are saying or asking?

Government doesn't create jobs remember? Romney said it himself. My wife is someone who took advantage of said free BC in order for us to not have a baby when we couldn't afford it.

Washington University just wrapped up a four year program where they gave 9,000 women free birth control.  Of the women that participated, 2/3's of them were younger than 25, 30% of them were currently on welfare, 50% reported having trouble paying for basic necessities within the past year, and 45% of them had previously had an abortion.  In other words, a good portion of the women were "at the bottom end". 

Both the pregnancy rates and the abortion rates of these women plummetted.  Abortion rates of the study group were 50% less than the St. Louis average and 70% less than the national average.  For girls aged 15-19, the birth rate for these girls was 6.3/1000, as opposed to the national average of 34.3/1000.  Go figure, birth control reduces pregnancies. 

 http://news.wustl.edu/news/Pages/24334.aspx

Kevin, what happens to those numbers when you fold abortifacients into the mix such as the pill, IUDs, the morning after pill, and such?

What is the estimated rate of conception when you add those factors?

I don't think anyone is arguging this. The Federal Govt. is throwing millions if not billions of dollars toward these types of studies and to groups like Planned Parenthood and we still have lots of unwanted pregnancies.

This as well as many other things is something the States, Counties and Local Govts. should be in charge of.

How have unwanted pregnancies changed in the USA since the Federal Govt. began funding Planned Parenthood?

Left Brain is arguing it.  He said that he "can say without a shadow of a doubt...access to birth control will do NOTHING to change the number of kids they have".  You'll never get people to stop having sex, but this study shows that you can drastically reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies.  And that's good for the entire country.

Ummm...birth rates plummet.  Women were offered their choice of contraception, which included IUD, the pill, the patch, condoms, etc.  Morning after pill was not a part of this study, women had to not be pregnant prior to being allowed to start. 

Three minutes of Romney talking on TV in high definition is devastaing... for Romney. Call me shallow, but that guy gives me the creeps.

Listened to some of it on the radio driving last night and had to ask my wife if I really just heard Romney say "binder full of women".  Wow, inspiring stuff. 

Talk to me more about what you mean by "access"?

Here's my opinion and I'm pretty sure, based on lots of government contract work, living and working abroad, that I'm right on this...

The Obama Administration didn't mislead anyone about the attack in Benghazi.  Honestly - they just didn't know what was going on.  No one did.  Two things that influence many people in this case:

1. Movies and TV shows which make you think that state department foreign facilities have high-tech surveillence, communiucations, security and spy equipment.  That everything feeds back to a special CIA room that looks like NORAD where they monitor everything in real time.  But in the real world, it's not Tom Clancy, 24, Bourne Identity... it's lowest bidder winning a government contract.  You would be shocked as to how LOW-TECH government infrastructure truly is.  The video system at the Benghazi most likely went to VHS, not a satellite uplink to Langley.  Have you ever seen what the FAA has to work with?  Have you ever seen "government computers"?  I've worked on and replaced many of them.  At best, they're the cheapest money can buy and most often kept in service 10 years beyond their servicable date.  Does anyone here actually still use Windows '98, have a 500MB hard drive and a dial-up modem?!  You would be shocked what many government employees have to work with!
2. Cable news and Internet media which have a financial incentive to release the story fastest and get the "scoop" over anyone else.  It's led to placing speed over accuracy.  Asumptions and talking heads can speculate and it's become part of the norm.

Also consider the following:

• This was a compound of buildings in Benghazi, not a full-blown embassy.  We're talking a place that was for the most part "off the grid".  Probably at most, all they had was cell phones to call someone in Washington and say, "we're under attack.  We don't know any details, but there are explosions and gunfire erupting outside."
• Chris Stevens was always a foreign diplomet who liked to be "out and amongst the people".  He often put himself in harm's way so that he could make personal connections with the people in the countries he was in.  He didn't stay inside the "green zone".  This is why Libyan officials liked him.  This "compound" most likely always was a security nightmare.  An easy target.

Until the FBI and military could get out on site and inspect what happened, I have no doubt that no one actually knew what happened.  There wasn't any political cover-up.  Now, if you want to make an argument of incompetence, that could have some validty...

1. The State Dept. security service wanted more security at the compound and it was refused.  Even if the request was accepted and more security forces added, it still may not have made any difference.  But they got that call dead-wrong.  Also, the CIA and State Dept also clearly got wrong the size and capabilities of al qaeda and other dangerous groups in the area.  An attack like this takes planning and there could have been some warning that the buildings were being targeted.
2. Hilary Clinton says that she's ultimately responsible for the safety and security of Stae Dept people abroad.  Yes.  Calling for her ouster would not be unreasonable.

The political aspect here is if the Obama Administration told the truth and simply said, "we don't really know exactly what happened.  We're trying to find out."  Then you could argue that they should know and know faster.  That there's an element of incompetence.  IMHO, not unreasonable.  But in the real world of government, I don't think ANY administration, liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican, could've actually known what was going on while it was happening and it would take a week to figure it out.

not that i think romney is a really socially aware guy that understands what "real folks" deal with, but it's fun to take 4 words out of the context of the whole sentence and use that to pick on the guy.  what he said was he only had applications from men, and he asked for profiles on female candidates and was presented with binders full of women.  but...memes and talking points are more fun to argue about.

 A "binder full of qualified female candidates" would have worked much better. Maybe if he was in touch with "real folks" he would have known that.

From what you've said and written here I can only come to the conclusion that you missed the Presidents address to the UN and you missed the UN Ambassadors interviews on the Sunday following the attacks.

This debate really did what I expected... nothing. Spin, clever "gottchas", jabs, barbs, talking points.

After two debates, I still don't know what Romneys actual plan is for the economy with actual numbers. Other than he is all about getting America working again.

After 4 years of Obama as President, I still have no clue what his plan is for the economy and how he actually plans on accomplishing it. He talks wonderfully on the subject.... problem is, there is no action behind it.

Obama says Romney's plan is to go back to Bush... and give rich people breaks.... nice class warfare fear mongering. Nice talking point.

Romney says Obama's plan is more of the same. Obama is stuck between a rock and a hard place... it is more of the same... or if he says he will do different... then why is he waiting until 2013 to do it... why wasn't it done in 2011? How does he plan on actually accomplishing what he so far has not been able to accomplish even if you do think his plan is best.

Other than that... same old liberal/conservative bull crap... abortion, give everyone free education, give illegals citizenship, give everyone tax breaks and more money somehow, make everyone rich... blah blah blah.

Abortifacients are not contraception, since conception may actually takes place.  
That would include for example the tertiary mechanism in most common compounds of the Pill. 

I now return you to your regularly scheduled kerfuffle.

Not sure if you're asking me or Left Brain.  As far as the Wash U study is concerned, women that signed up were given a pregnancy test.  Once it was confirmed that they were not pregnant, they were informed of the various methods of birth control available in the study, and then allowed to choose which they preferred.  If they wanted to be on the patch, they were given a paid-for prescription to a local pharmacy for the patch.  If they wanted an IUD, an onsite doctor implanted it.  Regardless of their choice, there was no cost to the woman, actually they were paid $15 for their participation.

And with that mehaner's point is proven.  Had he said "binder full of men" there would have been no mention of it.  But we all know that Romney is a woman hating pagan.

You don't have enough faith in people.

The best part of the debates was watching my 19 year old son react to what was being said and how it was presented. This is his first opportunity to vote, and he's been undecided to this point.

Opening with a 2-year old college student really resonated with him. Tuition and jobs are his two primary concerns (mine too!). The Town Hall format was so much more accessible to him. He said that two guys standing at the podium was too much like being in class.

By the end of the night he was no longer an undecided voter. I'm not going to say which candidate he thinks won the debate.  I will say I think I won because it was so amazing seeing my kid mature and put so much thought into the process. If only our politicians acted as intelligently...

Just for clarification, the US did have a surveillance drone flying over Benghazi for the final hour of the attack.  Those video feeds can be viewed near realtime to washington.  Sorry, had to defend my favorite author Tom Clancy.  

I do agree that while everything was going on it's difficult to know all the facts.  Even a drone flying over could have seen a huge crowd of people that wouldn't necessarily conflict with their belief of a riot.

I personally give them a lot of slack as far as the initial statements, but Obama going to bed while the attacks were going on and strutting off to Vegas the next day is as bad or worse than Bush flying over New Orleans and looking out the window.  I also don't give them slack after the entire world knew it was a terrorist attack, but the administration continued pushing the "spontaneous attack" talking points for the obvious reason of trying to deflect criticism.

Then last night in the debate the President did his best to stretch his rose garden speech to imply that he called it an act of terror the day after.  That was probably the most blatant political spin I've ever seen.